wdm

Projects that follow the best practices below can voluntarily self-certify and show that they've achieved an Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) best practices badge.

There is no set of practices that can guarantee that software will never have defects or vulnerabilities; even formal methods can fail if the specifications or assumptions are wrong. Nor is there any set of practices that can guarantee that a project will sustain a healthy and well-functioning development community. However, following best practices can help improve the results of projects. For example, some practices enable multi-person review before release, which can both help find otherwise hard-to-find technical vulnerabilities and help build trust and a desire for repeated interaction among developers from different companies. To earn a badge, all MUST and MUST NOT criteria must be met, all SHOULD criteria must be met OR be unmet with justification, and all SUGGESTED criteria must be met OR unmet (we want them considered at least). If you want to enter justification text as a generic comment, instead of being a rationale that the situation is acceptable, start the text block with '//' followed by a space. Feedback is welcome via the GitHub site as issues or pull requests There is also a mailing list for general discussion.

We gladly provide the information in several locales, however, if there is any conflict or inconsistency between the translations, the English version is the authoritative version.
If this is your project, please show your baseline badge status on your project page! The baseline badge status looks like this: Baseline badge level for project 13293 is baseline-3 Here is how to embed the baseline badge:
You can show your baseline badge status by embedding this in your markdown file:
[![OpenSSF Baseline](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13293/baseline)](https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13293)
or by embedding this in your HTML:
<a href="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13293"><img src="https://www.bestpractices.dev/projects/13293/baseline"></a>


These are the Baseline Level 2 criteria. These are criteria version v2026.02.19.

Baseline Series: Baseline Level 1 Baseline Level 2 Baseline Level 3

        

 Basics

  • General

    Note that other projects may use the same name.

    Webnestify Docker Manager

    Please use SPDX license expression format; examples include "Apache-2.0", "BSD-2-Clause", "BSD-3-Clause", "GPL-2.0+", "LGPL-3.0+", "MIT", and "(BSD-2-Clause OR Ruby)". Do not include single quotes or double quotes.
    If there is more than one language, list them as comma-separated values (spaces optional) and sort them from most to least used. If there is a long list, please list at least the first three most common ones. If there is no language (e.g., this is a documentation-only or test-only project), use the single character "-". Please use a conventional capitalization for each language, e.g., "JavaScript".
    The Common Platform Enumeration (CPE) is a structured naming scheme for information technology systems, software, and packages. It is used in a number of systems and databases when reporting vulnerabilities.

    wdm is a Go CLI/TUI for managing a curated set of Docker Compose self-hosting templates. The project is maintained in the public GitHub repository at
    https://github.com/wnstify/wdm, with releases, verification instructions, security policy, contributor guidance, CI, CodeQL, govulncheck, Scorecard, and signed release
    assets.

 Controls 19/19 ●

  • Controls


    Enough for a badge!

    When a CI/CD task is executed with no permissions specified, the CI/CD system MUST default the task's permissions to the lowest permissions granted in the pipeline. [OSPS-AC-04.01]
    Configure the project's settings to assign the lowest available permissions to new pipelines by default, granting additional permissions only when necessary for specific tasks.

    The GitHub repository is configured with read-only default workflow token permissions. Workflows also declare explicit least-privilege permissions; write permissions are granted only to jobs that need them, such as CodeQL SARIF upload and the tag-gated release publishing job


    Enough for a badge!

    When an official release is created, that release MUST be assigned a unique version identifier. [OSPS-BR-02.01]
    Assign a unique version identifier to each release produced by the project, following a consistent naming convention or numbering scheme. Examples include SemVer, CalVer, or git commit id.

    Official releases use unique semantic version tags such as v1.0.0. The release workflow only publishes from refs/tags/v* and stamps the built binary with the tag
    version, so each official release is tied to a unique version identifier.


    Enough for a badge!

    When an official release is created, that release MUST contain a descriptive log of functional and security modifications. [OSPS-BR-04.01]
    Ensure that all releases include a descriptive change log. It is recommended to ensure that the change log is human-readable and includes details beyond commit messages, such as descriptions of the security impact or relevance to different use cases. To ensure machine readability, place the content under a markdown header such as "## Changelog".

    Non-trivial release notes file in repository: https://github.com/wnstify/wdm/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md. [release_notes]


    Enough for a badge!

    When a build and release pipeline ingests dependencies, it MUST use standardized tooling where available. [OSPS-BR-05.01]
    Use a common tooling for your ecosystem, such as package managers or dependency management tools to ingest dependencies at build time. This may include using a dependency file, lock file, or manifest to specify the required dependencies, which are then pulled in by the build system.

    The build and release pipeline uses standard Go module tooling for dependencies. CI uses actions/setup-go, go mod verify, go mod tidy -diff, go build, go test, govulncheck, and the checked-in go.mod/go.sum files. Release artifacts are built by GitHub Actions using the same Go module dependency mechanism.


    Enough for a badge!

    When an official release is created, that release MUST be signed or accounted for in a signed manifest including each asset's cryptographic hashes. [OSPS-BR-06.01]
    Sign all released software assets at build time with a cryptographic signature or attestations, such as GPG or PGP signature, Sigstore signatures, SLSA provenance, or SLSA VSAs. Include the cryptographic hashes of each asset in a signed manifest or metadata file.

    Official releases include SHA256SUMS, which lists cryptographic hashes for the release payload assets. SHA256SUMS is signed with a detached Ed25519 signature and also covered by a keyless cosign/Sigstore bundle. SECURITY.md documents how to verify the signed manifest and then verify each asset hash.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include a description of how the project selects, obtains, and tracks its dependencies. [OSPS-DO-06.01]
    It is recommended to publish this information alongside the project's technical & design documentation on a publicly viewable resource such as the source code repository, project website, or other channel.

    The repository documents that Go dependencies are managed through go.mod and go.sum, with make tidy used to maintain them. CI verifies go.mod/go.sum with go mod verify and go mod tidy -diff, and Dependabot is configured to track Go module updates.


    Enough for a badge!

    The project documentation MUST include instructions on how to build the software, including required libraries, frameworks, SDKs, and dependencies. [OSPS-DO-07.01]
    It is recommended to publish this information alongside the project's contributor documentation, such as in CONTRIBUTING.md or other developer task documentation. This may also be documented using Makefile targets or other automation scripts.

    CONTRIBUTING.md documents the build prerequisites, including Go 1.26, Docker 20.10+ with Compose V2 for e2e tests, and the Linux amd64 target. It also lists the Make targets for building, testing, linting, vetting, formatting, tidying dependencies, and running e2e tests.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST include a list of project members with access to sensitive resources. [OSPS-GV-01.01]
    Document project participants and their roles through such artifacts as members.md, governance.md, maintainers.md, or similar file within the source code repository of the project. This may be as simple as including names or account handles in a list of maintainers, or more complex depending on the project's governance.

    CODEOWNERS lists @wnstfy as the repository maintainer responsible for all paths in the project. The project currently has a single maintainer with access to sensitive
    repository resources such as repository settings, protected branches, Actions secrets, and release controls.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST include descriptions of the roles and responsibilities for members of the project. [OSPS-GV-01.02]
    Document project participants and their roles through such artifacts as members.md, governance.md, maintainers.md, or similar file within the source code repository of the project.

    CODEOWNERS documents that @wnstfy is the repository maintainer responsible for reviewing changes to every path. CONTRIBUTING.md documents contributor responsibilities
    for focused commits, running checks, opening pull requests, following the code of conduct, and reporting security issues privately.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST include a guide for code contributors that includes requirements for acceptable contributions. [OSPS-GV-03.02]
    Extend the CONTRIBUTING.md or CONTRIBUTING/ contents in the project documentation to outline the requirements for acceptable contributions, including coding standards, testing requirements, and submission guidelines for code contributors. It is recommended that this guide is the source of truth for both contributors and approvers.

    CONTRIBUTING.md provides the contributor guide. It lists prerequisites, build and test commands, project layout, pull request expectations, licensing terms for contributions, code of conduct, and security reporting requirements.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the version control system MUST require all code contributors to assert that they are legally authorized to make the associated contributions on every commit. [OSPS-LE-01.01]
    Include a DCO in the project's repository, requiring code contributors to assert that they are legally authorized to commit the associated contributions on every commit. Use a status check to ensure the assertion is made. A CLA also satisfies this requirement. Some version control systems, such as GitHub, may include this in the platform terms of service.

    The repository requires DCO signoff on every non-merge commit. CONTRIBUTING.md documents the required git commit -s workflow, the pull request template includes a DCO
    confirmation, and the repository has a dco GitHub Actions check that validates Signed-off-by trailers. The main branch ruleset requires the dco status check before
    merge.


    Enough for a badge!

    When a commit is made to the primary branch, any automated status checks for commits MUST pass or be manually bypassed. [OSPS-QA-03.01]
    Configure the project's version control system to require that all automated status checks pass or require manual acknowledgement before a commit can be merged into the primary branch. It is recommended that any optional status checks are NOT configured as a pass or fail requirement that approvers may be tempted to bypass.

    The primary branch main is protected by an active GitHub repository ruleset. Commits to main must pass strict required status checks before merge, including lint, test, govulncheck, and analyze-go, unless manually bypassed by repository administrators.


    Enough for a badge!

    Prior to a commit being accepted, the project's CI/CD pipelines MUST run at least one automated test suite to ensure the changes meet expectations. [OSPS-QA-06.01]
    Automated tests should be run prior to every merge into the primary branch. The test suite should be run in a CI/CD pipeline and the results should be visible to all contributors. The test suite should be run in a consistent environment and should be run in a way that allows contributors to run the tests locally. Examples of test suites include unit tests, integration tests, and end-to-end tests.

    The protected main branch requires the test status check before changes are accepted. The test workflow runs the automated Go test suite through make coverage-check, and CI also runs lint, govulncheck, and CodeQL checks


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include design documentation demonstrating all actions and actors within the system. [OSPS-SA-01.01]
    Include designs in the project documentation that explains the actions and actors. Actors include any subsystem or entity that can influence another segment in the system. Ensure this is updated for new features or breaking changes.

    The repository includes SECURITY-DESIGN.md, which documents system actors, main actions, trust boundaries, external interfaces, security controls, and the assessed high-impact risks for the released software.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project documentation MUST include descriptions of all external software interfaces of the released software assets. [OSPS-SA-02.01]
    Document all software interfaces (APIs) of the released software assets, explaining how users can interact with the software and what data is expected or produced. Ensure this is updated for new features or breaking changes.

    The public documentation describes the released software interfaces: README.md documents install, TUI entry point, safety model, and release assets; USAGE.md documents CLI commands, global flags, examples, exit codes, runtime layout, and verification behavior; SECURITY.md documents release artifact interfaces and verification assets.


    Enough for a badge!

    When the project has made a release, the project MUST perform a security assessment to understand the most likely and impactful potential security problems that could occur within the software. [OSPS-SA-03.01]
    Performing a security assessment informs both project members as well as downstream consumers that the project understands what problems could arise within the software. Understanding what threats could be realized helps the project manage and address risk. This information is useful to downstream consumers to demonstrate the security acumen and practices of the project. Ensure this is updated for new features or breaking changes.

    The project has performed security assessment through CodeQL SAST, govulncheck, OpenSSF Scorecard, branch/ruleset hardening, release-signing review, secret-scanning/ push-protection setup, and manual review of CI/CD token and signing-key exposure risks.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST include a policy for coordinated vulnerability disclosure (CVD), with a clear timeframe for response. [OSPS-VM-01.01]
    Create a SECURITY.md file at the root of the directory, outlining the project's policy for coordinated vulnerability disclosure. Include a method for reporting vulnerabilities. Set expectations for how the project will respond and address reported issues.

    SECURITY.md includes a coordinated vulnerability disclosure policy with private reporting instructions, acknowledgement within 7 calendar days, initial assessment within 14 calendar days, coordinated fix/mitigation handling, and disclosure after a fix or mitigation is available.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST provide a means for private vulnerability reporting directly to the security contacts within the project. [OSPS-VM-03.01]
    Provide a means for security researchers to report vulnerabilities privately to the project. This may be a dedicated email address, a web form, VCS specialized tools, email addresses for security contacts, or other methods.

    SECURITY.md provides private vulnerability reporting channels, including the project security email webnestify@webnestify.cloud and GitHub private vulnerability
    reporting when available on the repository Security tab.


    Enough for a badge!

    While active, the project documentation MUST publicly publish data about discovered vulnerabilities. [OSPS-VM-04.01]
    Provide information about known vulnerabilities in a predictable public channel, such as a CVE entry, blog post, or other medium. To the degree possible, this information should include affected version(s), how a consumer can determine if they are vulnerable, and instructions for mitigation or remediation.

    No project vulnerabilities have been publicly disclosed for this repository yet. SECURITY.md states that confirmed vulnerabilities will be published through GitHub Security Advisories when appropriate and referenced from release notes or changelog entries after disclosure.



This data is available under the Community Data License Agreement – Permissive, Version 2.0 (CDLA-Permissive-2.0). This means that a Data Recipient may share the Data, with or without modifications, so long as the Data Recipient makes available the text of this agreement with the shared Data. Please credit Simon Gajdosik and the OpenSSF Best Practices badge contributors.

Project badge entry owned by: Simon Gajdosik.
Entry created on 2026-06-18 06:21:41 UTC, last updated on 2026-06-22 16:56:13 UTC. Last achieved passing badge on 2026-06-18 07:31:42 UTC.